Current Events — HabitableZone

Current Events » in reply to Oh, puleeze

By the way...
Tom Brosz — (archived)

<The idea is to be able to choose, one way or the other. I hear you -- she chose already. Did she choose for her birth control method to fail? Did she choose to be raped by her date or by a stranger? Did she choose for the man she thought loved her to run out on her? Did she choose to transmit a fatal, painful genetic disease?

Ah, it must be simple to be right.



Actually, now that you mention it, it is a lot less work to be right. It's difficult and tedious to keep trying to bend reality to fit an incorrect viewpoint.

Choice? Yes, she chose to screw someone without being ready or in the right committed relationship (marriage) to deal with the possible consequences.

Damn few women are "forced" into abortions.

Fetal abnormality accounts for 3 percent of abortions. Rape about 1 percent. Mother's health another 3 percent. 12 percent could possibly fall under the category of avoiding being forced into single motherhood by a man running out on her. What does that leave?

http://www.krla.org/images/wpe2D.gif


More data here.

Most of the categories can be lumped under the simple concept "baby would be inconvenient." If a baby would be inconvenient, I would recommend not screwing anyone. But in this age of "if it feels good, do it," this is a highly unpopular attitude. Just mentioning abstinence gives liberals and radical feminists hives.

It is also worth noting that most of the reasons for aborting a child given in the tables could also be solved by carrying the baby to term and putting it up for adoption. Honestly, how many women have abortions specifically because they are worried about the health problems of a pregnancy? Unless this falls under the 3 percent of "mother's health," I don't even see it on the chart.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (68 posts)